Kosmosaic Books – G.L. Breedon

I came across two things that at first seemed unrelated to me that later came together in my mind while I was walking home last night. The first is a fun blog over at Electrical Engineering Times. Clive Maxfield has a blog where he often discusses sci-fi geek stuff, because who better to enjoy sci-fi geek stuff than electrical engineering geeks. He has a post in which he listed his favorite generation ship sci-fi novels. There is a nice entry on Wikipedia that explains generation ships and gives some examples from literature and film. There is also booak by Simone Caroti called The Generation Starship in Science Fiction: A Critical History, 1934-2001. I haven’t read the book (it’s a bit pricey), but it sounds interesting from  the bits I’ve perused on Google Books.

Maxfield lists several novels: Robert Heinlein’s Orphans of the Sky, Brian Aldiss’ Nonstop (aka Starship), Gregg Bear’s Eon, John Varley’s Titan (which isn’t really a generation ship), and Arthur C. Clark’s Rendezvous with Rama. He also mentions the films Pandorum and Wall-E. The only one I hadn’t read or seen was Harry Harrison’s Captive Universe, which I promptly ordered used from Amazon.  However, Maxfield didn’t mention the Canadian TV series Star Lost (created by Harlan Ellison), which is a fun but, dated series.

It’s interesting how many generation ship stories revolve around a crew that has forgotten they are on a starship. I wonder why that is?

Something else I saw made me think about generation ships, or at least colony ships.  Physicist Marcin Jakubowski, founder of Open Source Ecology, is leading a team in assembling the Global Village Construction Set, an open source set of blueprints and instructions for fabricating the 50 essential industrial machines for a modern civilization. The intent is that communities and governments in developing nations can use this construction set to jump-start their societies and economies and create higher standards of living for their citizens.

That’s a great idea, and a huge help to people living in developing nations. Of course, my first thought was that these are the same 50 industrial machines that would be required for creating a modern civilization from scratch on a new planet.

And thought led me to thinking about the work of the folks at the DARPA 100 Year Starship Study and Paul Gilster’s Centauri Dreams blog. The 100 Year Starship Study was a symposium held this past October to explore the various disciples necessary to mount an interstellar expedition while Glister’s blog is a more personal exploration of the same subjects.

I’ve given some thought to what it might be like to live on a generation ship. The Celestial Blade (The Starhip Destiny – Book 1) takes place on a generation ship making a 2000-year voyage to the Andromeda galaxy in hopes of responding to a radio message. It’s not just humans, but several species, each in their own continent-sized compartment, making the journey. The story had less to do with the end result of the voyage and more to do with a mutiny, but it’s fun to contemplate the process of travelling great interstellar distances in a mammoth starship. Clearly it’s a theme that has resonated with some of the best sci-fi writers. Hopefully, my contribution to the sub-genre will be as entertaining and thought provoking

The Wizard of Time Kindle ebook is FREE at Amazon for the Christmas holiday, Dec. 24, 25, & 26.  Enjoy some time travel and magic with your turkey and stuffing.

Happy Holidays!

Farhad Manjoo has an article this week in Slate where he states that we should abandon small local bookstores because they are inefficient and their books tend to cost more. They also have limited shelf space, thus limited selections, no reviews, and only employee recommendations for purchasing guidance.

Needless to say, lovers of small indie bookstores were not amused. Salon has a responding article. There will be many others I’m sure.

I think both articles (and the attending comments to them) miss the point. Yes, some people do like supporting their local indie bookstores and don’t mind paying more for their books, but Manjoo’s criticisms are still valid. But, as the world of readers moves toward greater and greater ebook consumption, those criticisms of small bookstore will continue to be true. It will be harder and harder for a small bookstore with physical books to compete with the endless ebook shelves that Amazon and others make possible.

Which does not mean that our local bookstores need to disappear – they need to re-envision themselves as local reading centers, rather than local bookstores.  They need to rethink the business model of selling paper books, because except for high-end coffee table books and some text books, book sales will be dominated by ebooks. Eventually, I believe, competition from indie authors and smaller ebook presses will bring the price of mainstream ebooks down to the point where they are not just competitive with paper books, but low enough to make the choice obvious. At that point, indie bookstores will need to sell something else. Coffee is probably not a bad idea.

I’m a big fan of local businesses as they tend to drive their profits back into the communities they serve rather than shareholders on the other side of the country or the world.  But they need to give you a reason other than local loyalty to walk through the door. There is a lovely little indie bookstore in my neighborhood, but I rarely frequent it. Firstly, they have a woefully small selection of sci-fi and fantasy. Secondly, I tend to buy my books at the used bookstore down the street, or for half the price from Amazon, or as an ebook. There just isn’t much reason for me to wander in to browse. I suppose a store that is more genre oriented might get better foot traffic depending on the location. Forbidden Planet, in Manhattan gets plenty of foot traffic (although I have no idea how their sales are doing and they sell much more than just books). And Books of Wonder (also Manhattan) wisely gave up floor space to combine with Cupcake Café.

Author readings and musical performance can bring some people in, but I just don’t see how indie bookstores are going to survive trying to lure people into buy books they can get cheaper as ebooks directly to their reading device without having to reach into their wallet.

On the other hand, I can’t see people giving up reading in coffee shops. People like to get their coffee and sit and read. They like to sit and read period. So, don’t try to sell them books, sell them an elevated experience of reading. An experience they maybe can’t get at home. A quiet, attractive, well-lit place to read, surrounded by books that they can read sitting on a nice couch sipping a cup of tea, or high priced books they can rent weekly for a small fee, or even courtesy ebook readers with paid local advertising. And while they might still sell a few paper books, maybe they sell everything else that a reader could want: ebook readers, slip cases, lamps, pro-reading t-shirts and hats, parchments, pens, paper, and anything else they think people will like. Maybe they still have free readings, but maybe they also have paid classes to explore authors and genres. Maybe even classes on writing and ebook publishing.

Those are just some ideas off the top of my head. Maybe some would work. Maybe some wouldn’t. But indie bookstores will have to learn to adapt or they will end up like Borders. Which would be a shame.

This continues from Part 1 and Part 2

PART THREE: Simple Rules

So, if this is how I am defining religion and spirituality, what criteria can I establish for exploring those twin issues in science fiction and fantasy (or any work of fiction)?

First, is that while the story may be about religion and spirituality, or it may play a role in the story, these subjects cannot get in the way of the story. Stories are about people doing things – not about people sitting around talking about things. Charters might take the time to explain something of a religious or spiritual nature, or a paragraph or two of descriptive text might be expended on these subjects, but not pages, not whole scenes. Not unless it is integral to the drama and the action of the story and plot. I loved Stranger in a Strange Land when I was a young teenager, but found the long conversations about quasi-spiritual libertarian philosophy to be plot killing when I re-read it a few years ago. The point is not to preach ideas, but to entertain with ideas.

Secondly, since stories are about people and what they do (and what happens to them), any involvement of spirituality and or religion must be grounded in the characters’ lives and experiences. So, if religion and spirituality are going to play a part in the story they need to be grounded in the characters’ lives physically, emotionally, intellectually, and practically. This means we need to see not only how the practice their faith, but why, and what effects it has on them, and how it affects the rest of their lives, or their interactions with other characters. This will be particularly important if trying to contrast the differences between religious beliefs and spiritual practice – how they can be at odds, but how they can also be united.

Thirdly, there must be a sufficient level of depth to the religion and spirituality in the world that the story takes place in; otherwise it’s just set bad dressing – A flat scenic painting dropped behind the actors to give color to the stage. A good set is something that the actors can engage with and which affects what their characters can do (clearly, my theater background is coming out). As with world building in general, the religion and spirituality must have enough complexity and consistence to lend the patina of reality to the story, but without getting bogged down in paragraph after paragraph of description, or worse yet, page after page of dialogue driven exposition. Knowing the history, theology, rituals, and organization of the story’s religions is important, but that doesn’t mean the reader needs to know all if as well. The reader needs to know what will help them understand the character, to better see through his or her eyes, and to understand the plot, what happens and when, so they can enjoy the story as a whole. If something crucial can’t be explained in two paragraphs or a short exchange of dialogue, rethink its placement and connection to the story. Or explain it in stages over the course of the story.

Fourthly, the best way to accomplish keeping the religious and spiritual themes from overwhelming or spoiling the story and characters’ lives is to make it an integral part of the plot. If you want to make something interesting, make it a mystery – reveal it slowly over the course of the story and make the plot points hinge upon the revelations.

Lastly, be clear about why you want to explore spirituality and religion in your story. Are you trying to examine issues and ideas that will be relative to the reader’s life, or are you trying to promulgate a particular religious or spiritual perspective in favor of others? Avoid the latter. People have enough trouble thinking about religion, because it challenges their sense of self. If they are devoutly religious, they can find other religious perspectives an affront to their own sense of being. The various theologies can’t all be right – so, if one accepts the principles those theologies are based on – someone must be wrong, and no one wants to believe it might they might be wrong. Atheists, of course, think all religious beliefs are wrong, but they can cling just as tightly to their perspective and find it just as threatening to talk about something like spirituality. And those who eschew a particular religious faith for a generic spiritual path, may be resistant to paths other than their own. In general, tread lightly, but firmly, and avoid preaching. Try to favor exploring and examining the core issues at the heart of religious and spiritual traditions (and humanist philosophies): What does it mean to be human? What does it mean to be a better human? Can we be better humans? How? Why should we want to? How should we live our lives? How can we build a better human society? What would it look like? What are our common human values? Are there universal values and beliefs?

Those are interesting questions. Questions we’ve been asking ourselves and each other for thousands of years and will continue to ask ourselves for thousands more years. Hopefully, I can address those questions from a unique and passionate manner that helps readers in their own personal search for the answers to them. That will be my goal in trying to incorporate issues of religion and spirituality (as well as science, history, art, and philosophy) in my science fiction and fantasy writing.

This continues from the previous post.

PART TWO: Definitions.

It helps to have definitions of the things you are trying to explore as well as a grounded understanding of them in both practical and theoretical terms. This is one of the reasons I decided to become ordained as in interfaith minister – to get some practical, and well as theoretical, knowledge of the world’s faith and wisdom traditions. So, what do I mean when I talk about religion and spirituality? How are they different? How are they related? Can you be religious without being spiritual? Can you be spiritual without being religious? I believe the answer to both those questions is, yes. Part of that reason lies in the definitions I apply to them.

To me, religion is about answering questions of how we came to be here, how we are to live while we are here, and what happens to us when we die. Religions can be about much more than those things, but those are, to me, the three central questions. Spirituality, to me, is about more than one thing as well. It’s about transcending a limited sense of self for a wider view that opens one’s mind to the interrelatedness, interdependence, and ultimate non-dual nature of the universe. It’s also about achieving, through this vision, a sense of inner peace – a mental and emotional equanimity unbroken by the trails and pains of life. And it is about cultivating an ever-deepening universal experience of compassion and love.

Philosopher Ken Wilber defined this difference between religion as spirituality as Translative vs Transformative – between providing rules for how behave and adhere to as set of beliefs vs a set of guides for how to shift our perception of ourselves and our world. In this way, spirituality does have an empirical streak. All of the world’s major religion have spiritual traditions, and these give a set of instructions to be followed, like experiments, in hopes of achieving certain results. If you do this meditation over a period of time, you will have a calmer mind, or you will reduce your anger, or you will become more compassionate, or you will experience your sense of self as an illusion, or you will experience the universe as a non-dual phenomenon. If thousands of people do the meditations and have similar results, one can provisionally accept the results as valid, and by extension, the method/meditation as a valid means of achieving those results. I know, those results are all in the mind, but all of our experiences are in the mind. Think of it as learning to shift one’s perspective to see those Magic Eye 3D images that were all the rage in the 90s. If nine people can see the 3D shark but the one person can’t, we can provisionally accept that there is a 3D shark hidden in that pattern of color.

This shift in perspective, to see reality in a new way is at the heart of spirituality, but not necessarily religion. This is why I think you can be religious without being spiritual, or spiritual without being religious. This is also why, I believe that while it is possible to reconcile, to a large degree, the various spiritual paths of the world, it is not possible to reconcile the various religious theologies. It’s practically impossible to reconcile theology within religions, much less between them, because theology is about accepting rules and ideas based not on experience, but on faith and let’s be honest, a good dose of imagination (maybe this was Horgan’s real issue with that particular school of Buddhism). You cannot prove the existence of any God, so you cannot prove, or disprove, any interpretation of what that God wants from his or her followers. So, theologies will always be at odds. But the different spiritual paths seem to have similar realizations and goals at their core – what Leibniz called the Perennial Philosophy – popularized in the last century by Aldous Huxley, author of the sci-fi classic Brave New World. Of course, different paths will lead to slightly different results. Buddhists describe the ultimate reality of the universe as Emptiness, Hindus as Brahman, Christians or Jewish mystics as Godhead, etc., but it seems only natural to me that their descriptions of an ultimate reality would be colored by different social and cultural factors resulting different, but similar, depictions.

This post became much longer than I had anticipated, so I’m breaking it into three parts.

PART ONE

I just read an article by John Horgan (reprinted in an edited version in Slate this week) about his decision to give up being a Buddhist. In actuality, it seems like he gave up his interest in becoming a Buddhist, but that’s a bit of quibbling. Horgan is the author of a number of books, particularly, Rational Mysticism, which is an investigation into the science behind mystic and spiritual experiences. It’s an interesting read, even though I often disagree with his conclusions.

Horgan’s article got me to thinking about how easy to is to dismiss spirituality, and religion in particular, because of theological propositions that fly in the face of rational empiricism and scientific evidence. In Horgan’s article (and in another article where he is more specific about why he stopped practicing Buddhist meditation) I get the impression that his intentions for meditating were at odds with the results he expected. He describes how much trouble he had controlling his thoughts, but seems to revel in the idea of uncontrolled thoughts and find distain for taking time to still one’s mind. He also presents odd arguments as to why meditation may not bear the same fruit for everyone, even suggesting that it might be harmful.

From the significant amount of research I’ve done, I would say that the chances of meditation being harmful for anyone are very slim, and would probably only be an issue for those dealing with serious psychological and or neurological issues, and these very same people might benefit from the right kind of meditation.

Possibly Horgan was not trying the right kind of meditation for him. He was practicing Zen meditation. Maybe he needed to try Vajrayana meditations (which can be more imaginative and visual), Vipassana (watching the breath/mind).

From my own personal experience, I have found that a daily Vajrayana Buddhist meditation practice has left me a calmer, more patient person. It has helped me be more compassionate and loving. It has helped me look past my focus on Self and see the needs of others. It has helped me realize that happiness is all in my mind. My external circumstance my make my life easier, but they won’t make me happy. If I’m not happy, I need to change the state of my mind. To me that is the essence of spirituality. Does it make you happier, more compassionate, more loving, more at peace? Too often spiritual seekers become attached to the desire for spiritual experiences. They read about mystic visions and see them as a sign of progress, or of advancement, or they simply view the spiritual path as a competition with video game-like level to be achieved. If your spiritual path isn’t making you a better human being, you probably need a different path. Maybe that was why Hoagan ditched the school of Buddhism he was following.

The more likely reason, I suspect, is that he rational mind could not accept the claims made by his teacher and Buddhism in general. For that, it’s harder to fault him. Reincarnation and karma are two theological tenets of Buddhism (and Hinduism & Jainism) that are nearly impossible to verify in an empirically scientific fashion. Ian Stevenson did some good research on reincarnation, but while it is suggestive, it is not conclusive. Reincarnation suggests some essence of each living being (soul, atman, very subtle mind) passes into another at conception or birth. And karma, while it seems a simple reframing of cause and effect, requires reincarnation to explain cause and effect from one lifetime to another – a sort of impartial cosmic justice acting like a law of nature.

Now, I believe in karma and reincarnation based on both research (like Stevenson’s) and experiences arising from deep meditative states. But, I hold that belief provisionally, with the understanding that it may be wrong, much the way scientists accept the conclusions of research and experimentation, but revise their opinions in the face of evidence. Physicists and astronomers believe most of the universe is composed of matter and energy that can’t be seen or measured. They believe this because their equations of how the universe works suggest that it is true. Given new evidence, or new equations, they will likely change their minds. This is why scientists are not likely to change their minds about evolution – because the evidence is very solid, although they may revise their interpretation of evolution based on new evidence. An interesting question to raise is if one can believe (even provisionally) in evolution and dark matter/energy based not on direct observation, but on extrapolation and circumstantial evidence, whether is reasonable to believe (provisionally) in reported phenomena like reincarnation. Obviously, I think it is. (Yes, I know it’s not a perfect analogy – there is clear evidence of biological evolution happening all the time – bacterial resistance to over prescribed drugs for instance).

I think it is the inability of most people to change their minds, or to keep their minds open to alternate interpretations and possibilities, that makes religion and spirituality so unattractive as subject matter for science fiction and fantasy. Yes, I’m finally bringing this around to science fiction and fantasy. I’m very much interested in how I can address issues like religion and spirituality in the sci-fi and fantasy I write.

Science fiction and fantasy are the perfect genres for exploring the questions at the heart of religious belief and of spirituality in general. But is there a set of criteria by which this exploration can best be pursued? That’s a question I’m trying to examine as I write my novels and as I plan and plot future novels.

(more to come)

Although I am in the middle of editing Summer’s Cauldron (Young Sorcerers Guild Book 2), I have been spending a lot of time thinking about the second book in The Wizard of Time series and the series as a whole. I had originally intended WOT to be a seven book series, each novel taking place roughly a year after the last. My thought had been to chart the growth or Gabriel and his powers as he moved from teenager to young man. However, it was always a bit of an artificial decision. I had chosen the seven transformational stages of a hero’s life from Joseph Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces as a story arc framework for the series. The seven stages he lays out are:

1.      Childhood of the Human Hero
2.      Hero as Warrior
3.      Hero as Lover
4.      Hero as Emperor and Tyrant
5.      Hero as World Redeemer
6.      Hero as Saint
7.      Departure of the Hero

While this is an interesting idea, and one that provided a roadmap to suggest where the larger story would go, it was also a limiting framework.

As I began to think about the series more, and the timeline for writing it (in addition to the YSG series and potentially the Starship Destiny series, not to mention a number of other stories I want to tell) I realized that a seven novel series might be too much. Especially since I would like to start writing the epic fantasy series I have in mind sometime in the next two years.

This led me to thinking about what kinds of series there are and how I might adjust my plans for WOT. It seems there are three basic types of series.

• Series that are open ended (Dr. Who, Disc World, Doc Savage, Harry Dresden, Star Trek, etc.). Even though the series ends, they could be continued.
• Series that have a definite beginning, middle, and end (Lost, Battlestar Galactica (the reboot), The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Wheel of Time, etc.). When the story is over there will be no more.
• Series that end, but get new life by telling different stories in the same world (Star Trek, Disc World, etc.)

It occurred to me after looking at this list that I had made wise choice in deciding to make the YSG series both open ended and give the first story cycle a definite ending. I’m not sure how many books there may eventually be in the YSG series, but the first story cycle follows the four seasons, which creates a built-in limit. That story cycle will end with the fourth novel. But the world of the and characters of the series could produce another story cycle that might be a trilogy.

So, deciding to think in terms of story cycles rather than simply the number of books in the series, I determined that I can compress the story arc I had intended for seven novels into a tight action packed trilogy. Which leaves the series open for additional story cycles later. After the next two WOT novels are finished I’ll think about what story cycles might be told in the future (about the past). Much of it will still be inspired by Campbell’s stages of transformation, I’m sure.

I’m not sure how long the series will go on for, but my thoughts at the moment lead me to believe that you stop writing a series when the possibilities of the characters or the world have been exhausted. Or when you get bored with it. Or so excited by something else that you can’t continue anymore. Of course it will also have to do with demand. If no one seems interest in more WOT, there might not be as much incentive to write more stories after the first trilogy.

My wife and I watched J.J. Abrams’ Super 8 the other night. While she merely enjoyed it, I loved it. It was like stepping back into my childhood, especially the sci-fi influenced imagination of my childhood.

The film takes place in the summer of 1979 and follows a group of friends making a super-8 zombie film and what happens when they witness and train crash that releases an alien into their town. It’s insanely fun. Especially if you were 11 years old in 1979 and spent the summer wishing your town would be invaded by aliens.

It gave me the idea to create a little collage of sci-fi in the summer of 1979. The result is above.